| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Posts: 9294

|
|
|
Post subject: == HMAS Gayunda (LMS) - under review ==
|
|
|
suggested by Tech_Hawk, who also found the schematic of the ship. I edited the image heavily to combine the two views in one. I think the end result looks great.
HMAS Gayunda
Cost: $0.2M (£35,000)
Available: Mar. 1885
| Code: |
Gunboat
360 tons
36m
10.5 knots
Armament: 1 x 8" BL
1 x 6" BL (100 lbs, 1920 f/s)
2 x 1.5" QF (2.8 lbs, 2000 f/s)
2 x MG
|
The 8 inch gun is the one at the front
The aft one is the 6 inch.
The armament of this ship changed a few times after 1905, but I keep here the original, because DR is not necessarily constrained within WWI years, and also because it's difficult to tell the actual cost of the modifications.
 _________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
Sun Oct 05, 2008 11:24 am |
|
|

Posts: 293

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
cool thanks that look great. you should see what it looks like now nothing like that because it has been used as a breakwater for many years. _________________
 |
|
Mon Oct 06, 2008 2:10 am |
|
|
 
Posts: 2190

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Beta (LMS) test series Gayunda
HMAS Gayunda .2 million dollars
Australia Destroyer/Gunboat Mar. 1885
Spd = 1
Bow Broadside Stern
M Btty 6/5/4/2 NA NA
M Btty NA 3/2/1/1 */2/1/1
AA = 2
TT = NA
DA = NA
Armor = 1 Vital Armor = 4 Hull = 1
SHALLOW DRAFT _________________ Gaming for 36 Years.

Last edited by lotharlutjens on Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:30 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:05 pm |
|
|
 Moderator
Posts: 938

|
|
|
Post subject: Re: == HMAS Gayunda (LMS) - under review ==
|
|
|
| Isn't that adorable? These were called flatiron gunboats, or Rendel gunboats, after the designer at Armstrong. Fire control was rather elementary for the big guns; you had to aim the entire ship at the target. I believe the intent was to get an ultra-cheap local defense vessel. |
|
Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:09 pm |
|
|
 
Posts: 2190

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Are you telling me the guns were fixed to fire only fore and aft ? (8" forward 6" aft)
Please illuminate me oh great and wise Tiornu. (BTW I'm only half kidding). You are a veritable fountain of knowledge when it comes to warships. Thank you so much for any input as always. _________________ Gaming for 36 Years.
 |
|
Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:22 pm |
|
|
 Moderator
Posts: 938

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
The forward gun, as completed, had no traverse. At least, that is my recollection. It was a disappearing mount with extremely slow rate of fire, probably muzzle-loading, and the hull provided a poor gunnery platform except in the stillest of waters. That aft gun was added later, so presumably it was more "normal." I'm not aware of any flatirons having their main guns altered to more modern standards, but I suppose its possible.
The flatirons went through a period when they were all the rage as they apparently offered weaker countries a viable deterrant. Fortunately there was little opportunity to learn how limited they really were. |
|
Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:07 am |
|
|
 Nothing but Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash.
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tiornu wrote: | The forward gun, as completed, had no traverse. At least, that is my recollection. It was a disappearing mount with extremely slow rate of fire, probably muzzle-loading, and the hull provided a poor gunnery platform except in the stillest of waters. That aft gun was added later, so presumably it was more "normal." I'm not aware of any flatirons having their main guns altered to more modern standards, but I suppose its possible.
The flatirons went through a period when they were all the rage as they apparently offered weaker countries a viable deterrant. Fortunately there was little opportunity to learn how limited they really were. |
Fortunately for the flatirons and thier crews at least. My historical 'field' if I can be said to have one, is the early US navy, where gunboats were repeatedly demonstrated to be ill-suited to fighting anything except other gunboats, and those only by boarding. Even anchored in calm water they were horrible shots. It seems to me that a weapons system that by design hands the opponent the choice of where, when and how to fight will never be the best choice. _________________
 |
|
Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:27 am |
|
|
 
Posts: 2190

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Thank You Tiornu, that will certainly give this card some character. _________________ Gaming for 36 Years.
 |
|
Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:29 am |
|
|
Posts: 9294

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Have Tiornu's comments been incorporated in the stats or SAs? _________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:53 am |
|
|
 SOCCEROO FEVER

Posts: 6918

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
It had a sister ship called Paluma. they were named in aboriginal Thunder and Lightning.
Please consider HMAS Australia (Battlecrusier) and HMAS Sydney as ships to include. _________________
 |
|
Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:10 am |
|
|
Posts: 9294

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
A very colourful unit. Bump to make sure we have latest stats before I make card. _________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:12 pm |
|
|
 
Posts: 2190

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Yes ND, this card has the Bow gun firing straight ahead while the Stern gun has traverse to Broadside. I think she can become a card. _________________ Gaming for 36 Years.
 |
|
Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:12 pm |
|
|
 Illuminated Insanity

Posts: 4592

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| lotharlutjens wrote: | | Yes ND, this card has the Bow gun firing straight ahead while the Stern gun has traverse to Broadside. I think she can become a card. |
A little late on that reply eh lothar?
Yeah I am poking over that long absence!
 _________________ Always Flying. Always Fighting. RIP JIMMY.
 |
|
Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:59 pm |
|
|
 
Posts: 2190

|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Your right Jesse, but at least I'm finally starting to get the boilers lit again. _________________ Gaming for 36 Years.
 |
|
Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:02 pm |
|
|
|